INTRODUCTION: The status of autoregulation is an important prognostic factor in traumatic brain injury (TBI), and is important to consider in the management of TBI patients. Pressure reactivity index (PRx) is a measure of autoregulation that has been thoroughly studied, but little is known about its variation in different subtypes of TBI. In this study, we examined the impact of PRx and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) on outcome in different TBI subtypes. METHODS: 107 patients were retrospectively studied. Data on PRx, CPP, and outcome were collected from our database. The first CT scan was classified according to the Marshall classification system. Patients were assigned to "diffuse" (Marshall class: diffuse-1, diffuse-2, and diffuse-3) or "focal" (Marshall class: diffuse-4, evacuated mass lesion, and non-evacuated mass lesion) groups. 2 × 2 tables were constructed calculating the proportions of favorable/unfavorable outcome at different combinations of PRx and CPP. RESULTS: Low PRx was significantly associated with favorable outcome in the combined group (p = 0.002) and the diffuse group (p = 0.04), but not in the focal group (p = 0.06). In the focal group higher CPP values were associated with worse outcome (p = 0.02). In diffuse injury patients with disturbed autoregulation (PRx >0.1), CPP >70 mmHg was associated with better outcome (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: TBI patients with diffuse injury may differ from those with mass lesions. In the latter higher levels of CPP may be harmful, possibly due to BBB disruption. In TBI patients with diffuse injury and disturbed autoregulation higher levels of CPP may be beneficial.
INTRODUCTION: The status of autoregulation is an important prognostic factor in traumatic brain injury (TBI), and is important to consider in the management of TBIpatients. Pressure reactivity index (PRx) is a measure of autoregulation that has been thoroughly studied, but little is known about its variation in different subtypes of TBI. In this study, we examined the impact of PRx and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) on outcome in different TBI subtypes. METHODS: 107 patients were retrospectively studied. Data on PRx, CPP, and outcome were collected from our database. The first CT scan was classified according to the Marshall classification system. Patients were assigned to "diffuse" (Marshall class: diffuse-1, diffuse-2, and diffuse-3) or "focal" (Marshall class: diffuse-4, evacuated mass lesion, and non-evacuated mass lesion) groups. 2 × 2 tables were constructed calculating the proportions of favorable/unfavorable outcome at different combinations of PRx and CPP. RESULTS: Low PRx was significantly associated with favorable outcome in the combined group (p = 0.002) and the diffuse group (p = 0.04), but not in the focal group (p = 0.06). In the focal group higher CPP values were associated with worse outcome (p = 0.02). In diffuse injurypatients with disturbed autoregulation (PRx >0.1), CPP >70 mmHg was associated with better outcome (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION:TBIpatients with diffuse injury may differ from those with mass lesions. In the latter higher levels of CPP may be harmful, possibly due to BBB disruption. In TBIpatients with diffuse injury and disturbed autoregulation higher levels of CPP may be beneficial.
Authors: Susan L Bratton; Randall M Chestnut; Jamshid Ghajar; Flora F McConnell Hammond; Odette A Harris; Roger Hartl; Geoffrey T Manley; Andrew Nemecek; David W Newell; Guy Rosenthal; Joost Schouten; Lori Shutter; Shelly D Timmons; Jamie S Ullman; Walter Videtta; Jack E Wilberger; David W Wright Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2007 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: D F Kelly; R K Kordestani; N A Martin; T Nguyen; D A Hovda; M Bergsneider; D L McArthur; D P Becker Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 1996-11 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Tim Howells; Kristin Elf; Patricia A Jones; Elisabeth Ronne-Engström; Ian Piper; Pelle Nilsson; Peter Andrews; Per Enblad Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Magdalena Hiler; Marek Czosnyka; Peter Hutchinson; Marcella Balestreri; Peter Smielewski; Basil Matta; John D Pickard Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Karol P Budohoski; Marek Czosnyka; Nicolas de Riva; Peter Smielewski; John D Pickard; David K Menon; Peter J Kirkpatrick; Andrea Lavinio Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Richard Rubenstein; Binggong Chang; John K Yue; Allen Chiu; Ethan A Winkler; Ava M Puccio; Ramon Diaz-Arrastia; Esther L Yuh; Pratik Mukherjee; Alex B Valadka; Wayne A Gordon; David O Okonkwo; Peter Davies; Sanjeev Agarwal; Fan Lin; George Sarkis; Hamad Yadikar; Zhihui Yang; Geoffrey T Manley; Kevin K W Wang; Shelly R Cooper; Kristen Dams-O'Connor; Allison J Borrasso; Tomoo Inoue; Andrew I R Maas; David K Menon; David M Schnyer; Mary J Vassar Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Carrie M Goodson; Kathryn Rosenblatt; Lucia Rivera-Lara; Paul Nyquist; Charles W Hogue Journal: J Intensive Care Med Date: 2016-10-25 Impact factor: 3.510
Authors: Andreas H Kramer; Philippe L Couillard; David A Zygun; Marcel J Aries; Clare N Gallagher Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2019-02 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Rupert Faltermeier; Martin A Proescholdt; Sylvia Bele; Alexander Brawanski Journal: Comput Math Methods Med Date: 2015-11-29 Impact factor: 2.238
Authors: Hadie Adams; Joseph Donnelly; Marek Czosnyka; Angelos G Kolias; Adel Helmy; David K Menon; Peter Smielewski; Peter J Hutchinson Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2017-07-25 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Martin A Proescholdt; Rupert Faltermeier; Sylvia Bele; Alexander Brawanski Journal: Comput Math Methods Med Date: 2017-01-31 Impact factor: 2.238